Some videos of my game

[worldsbesttenniscoach]

Court positioning today on WTA & ATP circuits is pathetic, compared to what it was decades ago. Go back, for instance, to the 1972 Wimbledon final between Smith & Nastase. You will see ourt positioning & anticipation that puts today's players to shame.

Even Rafa often has poor anticipation. For example, in one point of US Open final, Rafa hit passing shot to Novak's backhand volley. Rafa was way too far behind the baseline to begin with, & then Rafa's first reaction was too move parallel to the baseline. Smith & Nastase would have anticipated a short volley to the open court, which is what happened. But Nada reacted poorly, with no wise anticipation, so Nadal could not touch Djokovic's easy shot.

It is especially easy to expect a crosscourt easy volley off Novak's backhand, due to his grip for the backhand volley.

Coaches today teach wrong things, give out misinformation. Players have good, eager hearts, so they listen to those coaches, unfortunately. As Mr. Miyagi said in the first Karate Kid movie, "no such thing as bad student, only bad teacher."

Players in the past were constantly put under pressure, because opponents took the ball earlier on groundstrokee, opponents were frequently coming to net, opponents were always looking for opportunities to make approch shots. Therefore, players would learn, almost subconsciously, how to counterpunch & use the best counterpunching tactics.

Nowadays, players do not face such pressure, so they do not unconsciously learn how to counterpunch. And coaches teach the wrong thing --coaches teach, "when in trouble, retreat."

Also, someone asked mw which players have premature backswings, too far back. My answer is, "In today's pro game, most players." That is why players don't hit where they aim. They throw away points so early in the rallies. The game has become boring to watch. That is why interest in the game has fallen.

[bobbyswift]

Apples and oranges on court position being better in 1972. Stan Smith would not be serving and volleying at a modern returner 100 percent of the time. The bounce in ground stroke rallies is so different to the bounce of a knife volley.

[don_budge]

From Dong_budge...

I am not sure how can I fix my court position, what I am doing wrong? Dong_budge, you think I am too slow with my feet?

I took the liberty of spelling my user name to don_budge from "Dong_budge". Just in case there are any ladies watching. Oh forget it...who cares.

But no I wasn't referring to anything specific about your speed. You see there is a great difference between getting your ass in position and being quick...although being quick is certainly an asset. Good tennis players learn the art of anticipation. Knowing what your opponent can do in any given situation and instinctively leaning or even moving toward the position that you "feel" the shot is going to be. How important is that first step? Cheat when you feel the situation evolving.

I was talking more about the point that klacr says..."I simply tell them to feel or find where they think that contact point/ball impact will be and hold their racquet there. As the student becomes more comfortable with the find position, they can move further back in the court to strike the ball as long as they remember the find position. It's a great confidence booster as well and gets players who may be struggling a bit with timing and control to "get back to basics". I use this method as well on myself when my forehand seems to go on one of its infamous walkabouts."

Finding this point and being in position to receive the ball perfectly is a whole another dimension of the game of tennis. It's a three dimensional playing surface relative to the player and the ball. "Finding" that point and getting there is often the difference between two players where everything else is equal. The player that gets into position more often will find that this makes the difference between winning and losing. It's an intangible factor and one that is well worth discussing as klacr astutely points out.

I think that worldsbesttenniscoach has a valid point about the court positioning of the past but bobbyswift has a good counterpoint. The modern game of tennis is not the same game by definition as it was in 1972...I was at Don Budge's tennis camp in 1972 when the match that worldsbesttenniscoach is referring to took place. Stan Smith vs. the mercurial one...Ille Nastase. Another classic fire and ice rivalry...much like the John McEnroe vs. Björn Borg classic.

I feel bad for you younger guys and gals...you don't really know that you are missing anything. You can look at the old videos of classic tennis as much as you care too but you will never really get an appreciation for the "reality" of just how sweet it was. The video is deceptive...you cannot get an appreciation for the actual speed of the game. Sure...it looks slow but in reality it was anything but that.

It is sort of like trying to explain to a teenager nowadays that there actually was life without cellphones...they look at you as if you are a lunatic dinosaur. "How boring" there pitiful little programmed brains think with that dull look in their eyeballs...little do they know. Their eyes looks glazed over and sleepy...disconnected. Slowly but surely the race is being weaned off of reality. Real moments such as a cheetah landing on the hood of your car are few and far between these days. Reality becomes a thing of the past...much like classic tennis. If a tree falls in the forest and there was nobody there to hear it fall...did it actually fall?

[stroke]

Interesting these posts of wbc but I am not sure I can go along with most of them. Getting the "racket back too early and too far" isn't something most tour players are guilty of. All tour players prepare well for incoming balls in relation to time they have...never too early...late, yes, but only under duress. The "too early" issue doesn't seem to exist.

"Too far" may apply to Robin Soderling and possibly Fernando Gonzales but other than theirs, most forehand backswings these days seem to stay within the plane of the body.

Borg went beyond the plane of his body at times (and on his backhand) yet well within it at others. He seemed to do this in relation to the time he had and the shot he was playing. But then Borg was Borg...an anomaly.

Brian Gordon and Macci have never suggested forehands cannot be hit another way. Soderling was a good example with his "too far" backswing. Soderling had a massive forehand and blew Nadal clean off the court with it at the French Open in the only year Nadal lost. You don't have to follow the BG model but odds on most players might develop a better forehand if they did. There will always be exceptions...that's only human.

What I would most like to know from wbc is which players on the tour today are "too early and too far"?

I like how you provide examples at the highest level that make it clear what you are saying. Soderling and Fernando Gonzales are 2 great examples of great forehands that are not of the Brian Gordon type 3. There are others such as Hewitt and Florian Mayer. As Brian said, players are not robots. There are signitficant differences even in the players using the type 3 variety. Its just that Federer stands out as the gold standard. Short path to be ball, straight arm, perfect grip structure to take advantage of the strongest wrist position(using maximum wrist extension). He does it like a master(Brian's words), simply what appears to be the most efficient, effortless, forehand ever. It would be very interesting to know Fed's racquet head speed going into contact vs some other players.

[bobbyswift]

Teaching counter-attack today is much more difficult than 1972. Player is not chip and charging presenting you a target. Counter attack off hundred mile groundstroke with player at baseline totally different type of shot. Back in the day players disguised and held pass against incoming ball. Today power and spin have to be incredibly high and depth and placement are equally important.

[bobbyswift]

Last post replace depth with angle. Sorry

[10splayer]

Court positioning today on WTA & ATP circuits is pathetic, compared to what it was decades ago. Go back, for instance, to the 1972 Wimbledon final between Smith & Nastase. You will see ourt positioning & anticipation that puts today's players to shame.

Even Rafa often has poor anticipation. For example, in one point of US Open final, Rafa hit passing shot to Novak's backhand volley. Rafa was way too far behind the baseline to begin with, & then Rafa's first reaction was too move parallel to the baseline. Smith & Nastase would have anticipated a short volley to the open court, which is what happened. But Nada reacted poorly, with no wise anticipation, so Nadal could not touch Djokovic's easy shot.

It is especially easy to expect a crosscourt easy volley off Novak's backhand, due to his grip for the backhand volley.

Coaches today teach wrong things, give out misinformation. Players have good, eager hearts, so they listen to those coaches, unfortunately. As Mr. Miyagi said in the first Karate Kid movie, "no such thing as bad student, only bad teacher."

Players in the past were constantly put under pressure, because opponents took the ball earlier on groundstrokee, opponents were frequently coming to net, opponents were always looking for opportunities to make approch shots. Therefore, players would learn, almost subconsciously, how to counterpunch & use the best counterpunching tactics.

Nowadays, players do not face such pressure, so they do not unconsciously learn how to counterpunch. And coaches teach the wrong thing --coaches teach, "when in trouble, retreat."

Also, someone asked mw which players have premature backswings, too far back. My answer is, "In today's pro game, most players." That is why players don't hit where they aim. They throw away points so early in the rallies. The game has become boring to watch. That is why interest in the game has fallen.

Ok, so here's the thing. If you're arguing for shorter backswings, more direct swing lines, "not too far back" etc. then you're actually arguing on behalf of the model proposed by Gordon/Macci. That's why I took exception to your original comments.....Perhaps you should read the articles, before such condemnation.

As for the first part of this post, I just can't even fathom what you're saying. Nadal, Djoker, Fererrer, Murray, etc, can't defend? Stan Smith, really? As Bobbyswift said, it's an apples and oranges comparison...It's just not the same game. The modern game may not appeal to you. (and there are many who would agree) But to, again, cast dispersions on, and not appreciate the kind of athleticism and skill these guys are displaying is just mind boggeling to me.

For what it's worth, i can't stand the NBA compared to yesteryear. All offense, no defense, It's really a different game. Besides, not sure how relevent pressure, man to man defense, (as espoused by Gene Hackman on Hoosiers) is when the current NBA player can take off, jump over the little Hoosier guy and dunk the ball with his ball sack. Even though the current game bores me, I can appreciate a nut dunk just like the next guy.

[bobbyswift]

WBC has expressed many ideas that are important to him. I love reading his posts to search for new ideas. However in my opinion the concept of this site is learning is easier when it can be visual rather than words. It also appears a given to take the best pros of an era and to learn from them thru video and other resources rather than say they are doing most things wrong.

[stroke]

WBC has expressed many ideas that are important to him. I love reading his posts to search for new ideas. However in my opinion the concept of this site is learning is easier when it can be visual rather than words. It also appears a given to take the best pros of an era and to learn from them thru video and other resources rather than say they are doing most things wrong.

You, 10splayer, and I are definately on the same page here. The whole basis for Brian's ATP forehand is taken and learned from what has come to pass as the world class men's forehand has evolved. Brian could not have to begun to explain his studies to us without video examples. There simply are not going to be any video examples forthcoming from wbc. I do think wbc cares about tennis and I do hope he reads Brian's ATP forehand articles. WBC, if interested, you can find them under "past issues", May and June of 2012.

[stotty]

You, 10splayer, and I are definately on the same page here. The whole basis for Brian's ATP forehand is taken and learned from what has come to pass as the world class men's forehand has evolved. Brian could not have to begun to explain his studies to us without video examples. There simply are not going to be any video examples forthcoming from wbc. I do think wbc cares about tennis and I do hope he reads Brian's ATP forehand articles. WBC, if interested, you can find them under "past issues", May and June of 2012.

WBC just needs to cite more clearly what he means. Give specific examples. I'm sure even Nadal gets his court position wrong now and again...but on the whole it's pretty darned excellent. The same goes for the bulk of the ATP tour. As for anticipation, well, it's never been more acute...it has to be...the pace of the today's game makes anticipation vital. Nadal's anticipation is outstanding.

You cannot compare Nastase and Smith with, say, Nadal and Djokovic. The patterns of play are entirely different. No one would argue Nastase's anticipation at the net is better than Nadal's. Nastase spent half his life at the net while Nadal has so far only spent a fraction of his career at the net. But the game is different now and serve and volley and persistent approach play seems not to be an option.

But the burning question for me is who on the ATP tour gets their racket back "too early and too far"? I've been racking my brains over this one. Berdych is the only one I can think of who gets his racket back a tad earlier than others..on dead midcourt balls...anyone else? And the big swings are mostly gone, aren't they? Soderling was probably the last of them?

The best way for WBC to inform others and get his message across is to cite players and give specific examples. It's very important on the forum to be clear. This way we get our ideas qualified or rejected by other experienced coaches and so develop a better compass. I do this all the time.

[don_budge]

Thanks nikae...

What a great thread nikae...from the original post by you on November 17, 2011. Man...we can all think about what has happened since that day. In our lives, in the tennis world...in the world at large.

Some truly diverse opinions and posts. All for the better. Thanks to all of the participants. Good sports...without exception. What the hell!

[don_budge]

You gotta be like that...

6. Go forwards to meet the ball whenever possible, just like your main man Djokovic. Just like in shot #6 in video clip number one of your stuff. Of all of the discussion regards Djokovic vs. the Spanish conquistador, the aggressive movement going forwards is paramount to his control and therefore his success over Nadal. Djokovic is on his toes or rather in the front part of his feet whereas Nadal is on his heels...and he is getting rocked all over the court by the more aggressive Serbian. You gotta be like that...Nikae.

One of my best lines ever...you gotta be like that...nikae!

[worldsbesttenniscoach]

To my eyes, the "modern" forehand, epitomized by Macci & Nainkin, has regressed. Most forehands on WTA & ATP today have more motion towards the back fence than they do towards the target. Modern tennis is pretty boring. Many of the pro players just stand back on their heels, far behind the baseline, making errors early in the rally. No wonder interest in the sport is not as high as it used to be.

Macci modeled his forehand on Federer's forehand, but we all are now seeing all the flaws in Roger's forehand.

I fell sorry for all the players who are trained by the USTA player development program, with the Nainkin style forehand. It is easy to see players such as Stevens & McHale confused about their forehands. Sometimes they try the Nainkin way, which does not work well; then other times they try a more natural way to hit the forehand, that often works better. They are caught in a no man's land of technique.

Tsonga has a "modern" style forehand, but while trying his best in an exhibition set against Edberg a year ago in France, Tsonga escaped by a close tiebreak against an out of shape, out of practive, match soft Edberg. I know today's bias is that today's modern tennis game is so advanced, but in some ways, the level of pro tennis has regressed -- for instance, see my important comments about today's poor court positioning & anticipation, that I posted earlier in this thread.

Some respondents above mentioned Stepanek's forehand. I like Radek -- one of the more entertaining players. But even though his forehand is comparatively old school, he has common ground with the "modern" forehand in that he gets his racket back too far, too early, controlling the racket with only 1 hand, & then must overcome inertia by trying to get the racket started again.

[bobbyswift]

Were looking for positive examples'

[lobndropshot]

Why are people obsessed with the forehand?